Feminism as an Ancient Evil? A Christian Conservative Critique Through the Lens of Asherah and Jezebel, By Mrs Vera West
Matthew Littlefield's provocative opinion piece, "Feminism is An Ancient Evil," published on October 3, 2025, argues that feminism isn't a modern invention but a resurgence of an ancient, destructive force rooted in goddess worship and matriarchal subversion. Drawing on biblical narratives and Canaanite mythology, Littlefield ties contemporary feminism to figures like Asherah and Jezebel, framing it as a chaotic, even "satanic," ideology that upends godly order. He equates modern feminist practices like abortion to ancient human sacrifice, asserting that feminist cultures historically correlate with violence.
Littlefield's core claim hinges on the Canaanite goddess Asherah, whose mythology he sees as a proto-feminist blueprint. In the cited text from Korpel's Only One God? (2001), Asherah emerges as a power broker in the divine realm, manipulating her husband, El, to secure a palace for her son-in-law Baal. The account paints her as the "real power behind the ageing king," with goddesses like Anat and Asherah steering events despite male deities' nominal rule. Littlefield parallels this with Jezebel, the Phoenician princess in 1 Kings 21:5-7, who chides her husband Ahab's weakness and orchestrates Naboth's murder to seize his vineyard. Both women, he argues, embody a subversive matriarchal archetype, women dominating men, defying the "natural" order.
From a Christian conservative perspective, this resonates deeply. The Bible condemns Asherah worship (e.g., 2 Kings 23:4-7) and portrays Jezebel as a villain who imports Baal and Asherah cults, undermining Yahweh's authority (1 Kings 16:31-33). Littlefield sees this as evidence of an ancient "feminist" impulse: women wielding religious and political power to supplant patriarchal structures. He extends this to modernity, suggesting feminism's advocacy for women's leadership, especially in contexts like abortion, which he equates to Canaanite child sacrifice (e.g., Leviticus 18:21), revives this evil.
Littlefield's use of Jezebel is particularly striking. In 1 Kings 21, her assertive intervention — "Do you now govern Israel?" — is not just spousal overreach but a direct challenge to Ahab's authority, mirroring Asherah's sway over El. The biblical narrative frames her as a corrupting force, linked to idolatry and violence (e.g., the killing of prophets, 1 Kings 18:4). Littlefield doubles down by referencing the New Testament's "Jezebel" in Revelation 2:20, a figure accused of leading believers into "sexual immorality and eating food sacrificed to idols." This continuity suggests a timeless archetype: the woman who, through religious or cultural influence, disrupts divine order.
For Christian conservatives, this is a potent warning. The Bible's critique of Jezebel aligns with traditionalist readings of passages like 1 Timothy 2:12 ("I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man"). Littlefield's argument, that Asherah worship "unleashed feminism" and its chaos, casts feminism as a rebellion against God's design, where male headship reflects divine hierarchy (Ephesians 5:22-24). Abortion, in this view, is the modern equivalent of Molech's altar, with Planned Parenthood replacing ancient priests. The correlation to "bloody and violent cultures" draws from historical practices like Canaanite child sacrifice.
Littlefield's polemic extends to contemporary feminism, which he sees as cloaking ancient evils in progressive rhetoric. Just as brands overcorrect to signal inclusivity, feminism, in Littlefield's view, overcorrects historical inequities to enthrone women over men. He cites Per Faxneld's work on "satanic feminism," which explores how 19th-century feminists embraced subversive, even demonic, imagery to challenge patriarchy. By linking this to Asherah and Jezebel, Littlefield suggests a throughline: feminism, ancient or modern, inverts godly order, whether through goddess worship or reproductive rights.
This perspective isn't without critique. Secular or progressive readers might argue that equating feminism with human sacrifice is hyperbolic, ignoring how ancient matriarchal elements (e.g., Asherah's cult) empowered women in patriarchal societies. They'd point out that abortion, while contentious, isn't ritual murder but a complex ethical issue, with 59% of UK adults supporting legal access (YouGov, 2024). Moreover, the "violence" of feminist cultures is debatable, Scandinavian nations with strong feminist policies rank among the world's least violent. Yet, from Littlefield's lens, these counterpoints miss the spiritual stakes: feminism, by rejecting biblical hierarchy, courts chaos, whether in Canaan or Camden. Just consider feminism and women's lib's effects on the birth collapse in the West, and the attack upon marriage and masculinity.
Littlefield's piece ends with a rally cry for the Church and State conference, urging believers to "seek first the Kingdom of God" and resist feminism's tide. This aligns with our Christian conservative stance: feminism, as an ancient evil, isn't just a social trend but a spiritual battle. The solution? Return to biblical principles, male leadership, pro-life values, and worship of Christ over Asherah's modern avatars (be they feminism or DEI). Practically, this means:
Challenging cultural narratives: Call out feminism's overreach in media, as the user noted in advertising's imbalances.
Upholding biblical roles: Promote complementarianism, where men and women have distinct, God-ordained roles.
Engaging the public square: Support events that counter "satanic" ideologies with truth.
Littlefield's argument is bold, weaving ancient mythology, biblical exegesis, and modern critique into a cohesive, if polarising, narrative. It resonates with those who see feminism as overstepping. But it risks alienating those who view feminism as a spectrum of evil, rather than a monolithic evil. The Asherah-Jezebel link is compelling, but leans on selective readings; not all feminist expressions mirror ancient idolatry, and equating abortion to sacrifice oversimplifies a fraught debate. But a case for its evil can still be made in more modern terms.
What's undeniable is the call to examine cultural currents through a biblical lens. If feminism, in part, revives ancient power struggles, Christians are urged to respond with opposition, not just passive acceptance.
Comments